Heroes in the Harry Potter Series

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 176134

> Bart:
<SNIP>
> > So, it is obvious. These guys were not heroes. After all, they 
> weren't perfect.
> 
> Magpie:
> Hmmm...is anyone complaining that these guys aren't heroes because 
> they aren't perfect? Because I think that's a strawman. Being a 
hero 
> doesn't mean you're perfect. It also doesn't mean the audience 
isn't 
> supposed to ever have a problem with your behavior ever.
<SNIP>

Alla:

I actually agree with almost everything you said in this post - as in 
how people in general decide whether fictional character is a hero or 
not, meaning that this is my approach.

But does anyone complaining that these guys aren't heroes because 
they are not perfect?

Eh, sure people do complain about that IMO. The argument that good 
guys stoop to the level of bad guys because they used unforgiveables, 
I think was made quite often in the unforgivables thread.

I really do not want to get into unforgivables discussion again, I am 
just saying that I saw plenty of arguments that when good guys do bad 
things that means they are not perfect, not **good** enough.

Whether audience not supposed to have problems with them is IMO 
irrelevant, of course audience can have any problems with the 
characters, but complaints like that I read a plenty.

Just saying that I do not think it is a strawman at all.


Now what **underlines** those complaints maybe exactly what you said -
 reader is bugged by certain character and therefore he evaluates the 
wrong actions not in the - oh, his flaws just made him more heroic 
and human ( Harry for me.

Magpie:
<SNIP>
 Lancelot (who 
> I believe in some stories is not the Grail Hero *because* he 
boinked 
> Guinevere and in some versions you actually *do* have to be perfect 
> to find the Grail) can just not do it for some people because they 
> think he betrayed the king. That doesn't necessarily mean that same 
> person expects all heroes to be perfect--they might love the three 
> protagonists of LA Confidential and consider them heroes even 
though 
> they all do far worse things throughout the movie. They just think 
> White, Exeley and Vincennes are ultimately cool while Lancelot is a 
> jerk.


Alla:

Eh, sure I think of Lancelot as a big, big jerk, always did. I mean, 
he loved Arthur oh very so much that he did not hesitate to sleep 
with Gunevere. Never bought his love for Arthur, never will.

But I just do not see how what Bart said is  mutually exclusive from 
what you are saying.

Because I can say that for me Lancelot is not a hero because of his 
**concrete** action - betraying his king AND he also buggs the heck 
out of me as a character.


 
Magpie:
<SNIP>
> The problem with Harry Potter for some people is not, imo, that 
they 
> need him to be perfect, but that they just find the character, say, 
> a dull-witted little punk. That's why he doesn't seem like a hero 
to 
> them. He doesn't do it for them as a character. But the fact that 
> they know he's held up as a hero makes them talk about it in those 
> terms. So for instance, looking at something like Unforgivables, 
one 
> person might be that they are shocked and horrified at a good boy 
> using an Unforgivable and think a hero should never have that 
> *particular* flaw. Or it could just be that they're like, "Yup, 
> there's nothing in this universe that isn't a mark of honor when 
> Superbrat does it. I guess Harry's power of self-righteousness 
> protects him from the Unforgivableness" or whatever. 
<SNIP>


Alla:

Oh, but again the person does say which actions of Harry bug them, do 
they not?

Probably because they know that if they just say that they find the 
character to be dim witted something, their post has a chance to be 
be well, ignored in the discussion as argument with no support, 
unless person is doing an opinion piece obviously. 

So, again, how is it mutually exclusive from what Bart said. People 
do complain which actions of the characters make them less heroic, 
while probably basing their complaints on what you said **general 
dislike of the character**.

Am I badly confused again?

magpie: 
> In short, I don't think people want their heroes to be "perfect" in 
> the sense of doing nothing wrong ever. They just want their heroes 
> to be people that don't bug them, and that's going to vary from 
> person to person.   <SNIP>

Alla:

That is totally true of me.